3 ms·

> Maybe one should learn about Microsoft technologies properly instead of just bashing and writing M$. Well, if it so easy to build vanilla C/C++ code for .NET

> Maybe one should learn about Microsoft technologies properly instead of just bashing and writing M$. Well, if it so easy to build vanilla C/C++ code for .NET then Microsoft is definitely doing a very poor job promoting this feature ;) Does the cross-platform dotnet toolchain support building C/C++? I never saw this mentioned when reading about dotnet (it was always about C#).

pjmlp 4y ago
Managed C++ and C++/CLI are Windows only. Here is an article about Managed C++ from July 2002! https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1479/Introduction-to-Managed-C https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1479/Introduction-to-Ma... There are others when searching from 2002 articles. Mono did try to port them as well, https://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/languages/cplusplus/ https://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/languages/cplus... So you see, the information is out there.
- butthatsit 4y ago
  Well nice, really - but as you yourself point out, it's Windows only, and being locked to Windows is not an option. Perhaps if dotnet was open source and multi platform from the beginning, it would've been used instead of developing Wasm etc - but we're way past that.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    Actually, .NET has been an ECMA standard since the early days. That is how Mono started. Additionally here is some historical refreshing about two other attempts, https://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu https://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu https://www.codeguru.com/dotnet/net-nuts-bolts-the-joy-of-rotor/ https://www.codeguru.com/dotnet/net-nuts-bolts-the-joy-of-ro... A surviving clone of the repo is available here, https://github.com/SSCLI/sscli_20021101 https://github.com/SSCLI/sscli_20021101 Finally, this doesn't change the fact that the CLR was only yet another version of this idea, there are plenty of others since UNCOL in 1958.
    - butthatsit 4y ago
      That's cool, but you can't run standards. I tried Mono since its early days and kept trying until .NET Core came, but it was nowhere near production-ready, it wasn't enough for my school assignments, much less production. I'm not saying it changes anything. Wasm is just a more modern attempt, like .NET itself. I don't see any reason to prefer one or the other only because of its age.
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        Those school assignments would have been sorted out by using Windows in first place. It is not like all those beautiful WASM implementations support the same set of features, from the paper standard, https://webassembly.org/roadmap/ https://webassembly.org/roadmap/
        butthatsit 4y ago
        Well, I wanted to use Linux, not Windows. And my servers ran (and still run) Linux, not Windows. The point wasn't that I couldn't do my school assignments (I was forced to use Windows VM) but that not even this simple task could be accomplished - so running it in production was straight up impossible. Wasm is much newer than Mono was at the time. Let's wait.
  - kant2002 4y ago
    Technically you can always write you own C compiler like this project https://github.com/ForNeVeR/Cesium https://github.com/ForNeVeR/Cesium. Obviosuly C++ is much more complicated journey and require real investment. But at this point this is not CoreCLR limitations mostly.

pjmlp 4y ago

Managed C++ and C++/CLI are Windows only. Here is an article about Managed C++ from July 2002! https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1479/Introduction-to-Managed-C https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/1479/Introduction-to-Ma... There are others when searching from 2002 articles. Mono did try to port them as well, https://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/languages/cplusplus/ https://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/languages/cplus... So you see, the information is out there.

butthatsit 4y ago
Well nice, really - but as you yourself point out, it's Windows only, and being locked to Windows is not an option. Perhaps if dotnet was open source and multi platform from the beginning, it would've been used instead of developing Wasm etc - but we're way past that.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Actually, .NET has been an ECMA standard since the early days. That is how Mono started. Additionally here is some historical refreshing about two other attempts, https://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu https://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu https://www.codeguru.com/dotnet/net-nuts-bolts-the-joy-of-rotor/ https://www.codeguru.com/dotnet/net-nuts-bolts-the-joy-of-ro... A surviving clone of the repo is available here, https://github.com/SSCLI/sscli_20021101 https://github.com/SSCLI/sscli_20021101 Finally, this doesn't change the fact that the CLR was only yet another version of this idea, there are plenty of others since UNCOL in 1958.
  - butthatsit 4y ago
    That's cool, but you can't run standards. I tried Mono since its early days and kept trying until .NET Core came, but it was nowhere near production-ready, it wasn't enough for my school assignments, much less production. I'm not saying it changes anything. Wasm is just a more modern attempt, like .NET itself. I don't see any reason to prefer one or the other only because of its age.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      Those school assignments would have been sorted out by using Windows in first place. It is not like all those beautiful WASM implementations support the same set of features, from the paper standard, https://webassembly.org/roadmap/ https://webassembly.org/roadmap/
      - butthatsit 4y ago
        Well, I wanted to use Linux, not Windows. And my servers ran (and still run) Linux, not Windows. The point wasn't that I couldn't do my school assignments (I was forced to use Windows VM) but that not even this simple task could be accomplished - so running it in production was straight up impossible. Wasm is much newer than Mono was at the time. Let's wait.
- kant2002 4y ago
  Technically you can always write you own C compiler like this project https://github.com/ForNeVeR/Cesium https://github.com/ForNeVeR/Cesium. Obviosuly C++ is much more complicated journey and require real investment. But at this point this is not CoreCLR limitations mostly.